Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

driver100

fintail said:

I'd take a T-top 77-79 over one of these things any day:

driver100 said:

I agree, the Mirada is a beautifully designed and proportioned car......even the shark gills look good on it.

The T-Bird IMO is a mess. Ford tried to convert a Ford LTD II which was supposed to be a lighter car because of the gas shortages into a T-Bird to try to save production costs I am sure. The LTD was still pretty hefty for a smaller lighter model........and that T-Bird has no resemblance to what a T-Bird should be like.

That is even worse....making a Fairmount into a T-Bird. Another case of false economizing when you take a lower model car and convert it into a luxury car....though Ford is the king at doing that thing....they even do it today.

I guess it is smart in that they can make a luxury car that sells for less than other models....but, the result is a luxury car...that isn't that luxurious under the surface.

driver100

I doubt if the overhang was for insurance reasons...but, it is an interesting theory. This article names and shows pictures of some cars with the largest overhangs........and they think it detracts from the looks of the car.
CARS WITH SERIOUS OVERHANGS



Some examples include LTD II and Montegro (which I believe was the Mercury edition)





Continental Mark IV

1966 Matador

ab348

That last one is an Olds Toronado.

Mr_Shiftright

He must have seen the "toro" part

tbirdmarco

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8BYDoONCnxo

thebean

Has anyone heard from @abacomike lately?  I haven't seen him post in a day or more.

driver100

ab348 said:

That last one is an Olds Toronado.

You are right...the Matador got left out....a 66 Toronado.

driver100

thebean said:

Has anyone heard from @abacomike lately?  I haven't seen him post in a day or more.

The last time this happened he needed rest and didn't have too much to add...I am assuming he needs a few days to rest up. If we don't hear later in the week I'll try checking.

driver100

Guy in Toronto leases a bmw i3 - $900 a month for 4 years.
Ads say it will go 200KMs - about 120 miles on a charge.
Seems it only goes about 100 miles.
11 months later he checks the ad and finds out they quietly changed the ad to read it only goes about 100 miles.
He tries to get BMW to exchange the battery for a newer model that will go the full distance.
BMW stonewalls him.
BMW finally offers him $5000 toward the purchase of a new BMW.
He refuses, will never buy another BMW
Competition Bureau may get involved.

FULL STORY

fintail

$900/month 4 year lease on an i3? They saw him coming.

fintail

Of course, the king of that ideal is the Cimarron

I think Ford can do it OK now and then - MKZ isn't bad looking, and doesn't scream "Fusion".

driver100 said:

That is even worse....making a Fairmount into a T-Bird. Another case of false economizing when you take a lower model car and convert it into a luxury car....though Ford is the king at doing that thing....they even do it today.

I guess it is smart in that they can make a luxury car that sells for less than other models....but, the result is a luxury car...that isn't that luxurious under the surface.

venture

fintail said:

Of course, the king of that ideal is the Cimarron

I think Ford can do it OK now and then - MKZ isn't bad looking, and doesn't scream "Fusion".

driver100 said:

That is even worse....making a Fairmount into a T-Bird. Another case of false economizing when you take a lower model car and convert it into a luxury car....though Ford is the king at doing that thing....they even do it today.

I guess it is smart in that they can make a luxury car that sells for less than other models....but, the result is a luxury car...that isn't that luxurious under the surface.

Does it not scream anything else?

tjc78

At least the MKZ gets its own powertrain if you opt for the 400HP AWD model.   It's different enough IMO.  We've all talked about this before.  Every make has their "gussied up" versions of cars.  My Enclave is a fancy Traverse, an ES350 is a Camry (well, Avalon now), Caddy XT5 is an Acadia and so on. 

My feeling is as long as there is enough substance to the premium model it's ok.  Back in the 80s, there really wasn't most of the time.  

qbrozen

Delete

fintail

Maybe kind of a pseudo-Jag from the front? IMO much more convincing and upmarket than a Fairmontbird or Cavaladillac anyway.

I wonder if the Avalon is still a modified Camry platform, thus linking it all back to Camry once again.

venture said:

Does it not scream anything else?

roadburner

fintail said:

$900/month 4 year lease on an i3? They saw him coming.

Really. I hope that the dealer kissed him and sent flowers the next morning.

qbrozen

$970/mo, actually. First, that's Canadian money on a Canadian MSRP. But, second, I'd wager this guy buried a large chunk of negative equity. Third, I would assume electric cars in general would have lower ranges in Canada than the US due to the weather. In the article, they also quote him as saying, "It was the first fully electric car, kind of lower, more affordable price range..." Do they not have the Leaf in Canada?

bwia

Now, this is some serious overhang. I believe it is a 1981 Ford Granada that Ford advertised as equal to a MB C280.

Oops, where is the picture?

ab348

The Leaf has been available up here for at least 4 years. Seldom see them though.

ab348

bwia said:

Now, this is some serious overhang. I believe it is a 1981 Ford Granada that Ford advertised as equal to a MB C280.

Oops, where is the picture?

You need to click on the icon that always looked like a stamped letter to me but actually looks like this:

qbrozen

ab348 said:

The Leaf has been available up here for at least 4 years. Seldom see them though.

very poor reporting in that article. For more reasons than just that.

28firefighter

I would also be willing to bet that there is no $7500 in federal tax credit in Canada like there is here that can be passed back to the consumer via the finance arm.

ab348

To my knowledge there is no federal tax credit in Canada, which surprises me given that govs here generally love to subsidize such things. I think some provinces do offer some sort of incentive, but not Nova Scotia where I live, which is always on the verge of financial collapse. If there was, I might be looking at a Volt.

graphicguy

roadburner said:

fintail said:

$900/month 4 year lease on an i3? They saw him coming.

Really. I hope that the dealer kissed him and sent flowers the next morning.

Exactly! Wow....he should have stopped here for some advice before signing that deal! No wonder he's trying to back out of it.

fintail

i3 bases at 50K Canuckbucks (about $12 US at the latest exchange rates ) , even for a nicely equipped rex model, the lease seems high. I bet there's some kind of backstory.

jmonroe

bwia said:

Now, this is some serious overhang. I believe it is a 1981 Ford Granada that Ford advertised as equal to a MB C280.

Oops, where is the picture?

Don't blame me.

jmonroe

driver100

ab348 said:

The Leaf has been available up here for at least 4 years. Seldom see them though.

Terrible sales and big depreciation!

driver100

fintail said:

i3 bases at 50K Canuckbucks (about $12 US at the latest exchange rates ) , even for a nicely equipped rex model, the lease seems high. I bet there's some kind of backstory.

At almost $1000 a month he may be trying to get the buy out down to $0 and have it paid off at the end of the lease. I am not good at tax matters but I think if you did it right, you could write off the lease payments for business.....then buy the car back for $1000 at the end of the lease and have a nice second car for a cheap price. He may have his reasons for doing it that way.

Here is that 81 Granada....seems Ford is a leader in overhang;

driver100

jmonroe said:

bwia said:

Now, this is some serious overhang. I believe it is a 1981 Ford Granada that Ford advertised as equal to a MB C280.

Oops, where is the picture?

Don't blame me.

jmonroe

Why not....at least it makes you useful around here!

tbirdmarco

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzNm0olbv10

Mr_Shiftright

driver100 said:

fintail said:

i3 bases at 50K Canuckbucks (about $12 US at the latest exchange rates ) , even for a nicely equipped rex model, the lease seems high. I bet there's some kind of backstory.

At almost $1000 a month he may be trying to get the buy out down to $0 and have it paid off at the end of the lease. I am not good at tax matters but I think if you did it right, you could write off the lease payments for business.....then buy the car back for $1000 at the end of the lease and have a nice second car for a cheap price. He may have his reasons for doing it that way.

Here is that 81 Granada....seems Ford is a leader in overhang;

Hey..wait...isn't that a Mercedes 500 SEL?

bwia

driver100 said:

fintail said:

i3 bases at 50K Canuckbucks (about $12 US at the latest exchange rates ) , even for a nicely equipped rex model, the lease seems high. I bet there's some kind of backstory.

At almost $1000 a month he may be trying to get the buy out down to $0 and have it paid off at the end of the lease. I am not good at tax matters but I think if you did it right, you could write off the lease payments for business.....then buy the car back for $1000 at the end of the lease and have a nice second car for a cheap price. He may have his reasons for doing it that way.

Here is that 81 Granada....seems Ford is a leader in overhang;

Thanks @driver. This looks huge for a midsize sedan but Ford carried the overhang thing to the nth. degree. But then again, in the age of "no airbag" and lax seatbelt enforcement, use these overhang/bumpers provided some degree of protection to occupants.

driver100

lol.....yeh, now that you mention it, squared off looking, 4 doors, colored wheel discs, 4 door handles, chrome along bottom panel, 2 windshield wipers, same color as a lot of MBs of that era...........

oldfarmer50

fintail said:

Of course, the king of that ideal is the Cimarron

I think Ford can do it OK now and then - MKZ isn't bad looking, and doesn't scream "Fusion".

driver100 said:

That is even worse....making a Fairmount into a T-Bird. Another case of false economizing when you take a lower model car and convert it into a luxury car....though Ford is the king at doing that thing....they even do it today.

I guess it is smart in that they can make a luxury car that sells for less than other models....but, the result is a luxury car...that isn't that luxurious under the surface.

I was looking for a Cougar when I found out the Mark VIII and T bird were all derivitave of the same MN12 platform.

ab348

driver100 said:

lol.....yeh, now that you mention it, squared off looking, 4 doors, colored wheel discs, 4 door handles, chrome along bottom panel, 2 windshield wipers, same color as a lot of MBs of that era...........

tjc78

Yep same platform, but the Mark VIII got the DOHC 4.6, air suspension at all corners and a much nicer interior.  

Anyone remember the ads when the 93 first came out about how the car lowered at speed?

oldfarmer50

tjc78 said:

Yep same platform, but the Mark VIII got the DOHC 4.6, air suspension at all corners and a much nicer interior.  

Anyone remember the ads when the 93 first came out about how the car lowered at speed?

Yes it did but eventually it lowered to the ground when one or more parts of the system failed. With mine it was the leveling sensors in the front which made it look like it was praying to Mecca after a few days. Tried to find some cheap used ones on EBay and got frustrated. Changed the whole thing out to regular suspension.

It was cool while it lasted though.

The 4 valve Intec (Cobra) engine is still pretty cool on the entrance ramps.

explorerx4

Back in the 70's I'm sure driver100 wore a Nehru jacket and bell bottoms.
We don't hold it against him now.
That's just the way things were back then.

oldfarmer50

explorerx4 said:

Back in the 70's I'm sure driver100 wore a Nehru jacket and bell bottoms.
We don't hold it against him now.
That's just the way things were back then.

I'm sure he looked very stylish. I myself have a pristine leisure suit somewhere in the back of the closet.

explorerx4

@oldfarmer50,
Post a picture of you in that bad boy.

driver100

bwia said:

driver100 said:

fintail said:

i3 bases at 50K Canuckbucks (about $12 US at the latest exchange rates ) , even for a nicely equipped rex model, the lease seems high. I bet there's some kind of backstory.

At almost $1000 a month he may be trying to get the buy out down to $0 and have it paid off at the end of the lease. I am not good at tax matters but I think if you did it right, you could write off the lease payments for business.....then buy the car back for $1000 at the end of the lease and have a nice second car for a cheap price. He may have his reasons for doing it that way.

Here is that 81 Granada....seems Ford is a leader in overhang;

Thanks @driver. This looks huge for a midsize sedan but Ford carried the overhang thing to the nth. degree. But then again, in the age of "no airbag" and lax seatbelt enforcement, use these overhang/bumpers provided some degree of protection to occupants.

Those were the original Ford "crumple zones", also copied from Mercedes - first used in 1959.

driver100

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

lol.....yeh, now that you mention it, squared off looking, 4 doors, colored wheel discs, 4 door handles, chrome along bottom panel, 2 windshield wipers, same color as a lot of MBs of that era...........

"A true story!" I think that parking cop must need a new prescription for glasses....that looks nothing like a Cadillac.

driver100

explorerx4 said:

Back in the 70's I'm sure driver100 wore a Nehru jacket and bell bottoms.
We don't hold it against him now.
That's just the way things were back then.

I never ever owned a Nehru jacket though I did have liesure suits for business....didn't need a tie!


Not sure about bell bottoms though I remember flared pants. In high school I had a Sonny Bono jacket, a jacket with the sleeves cut off......which I hacked off myself.

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

fintail said:

Of course, the king of that ideal is the Cimarron

I think Ford can do it OK now and then - MKZ isn't bad looking, and doesn't scream "Fusion".

driver100 said:

That is even worse....making a Fairmount into a T-Bird. Another case of false economizing when you take a lower model car and convert it into a luxury car....though Ford is the king at doing that thing....they even do it today.

I guess it is smart in that they can make a luxury car that sells for less than other models....but, the result is a luxury car...that isn't that luxurious under the surface.

I was looking for a Cougar when I found out the Mark VIII and T bird were all derivitave of the same MN12 platform.

That is when cars looked like cars....not like this:

imidazol97

When discussing the extended front ends on some cars from the 80s era, I believed I recalled that the designs were judged based on the amount of damage in low speed collisions as a way to judge the efficacy of the bumper/ front end design. Others didn't recall that. But I found an article where a lot of discussion alludes to that being the case until a rewrite of the requirements. The article mentions the varying costs and goes into the problem is varying bumper heights making bumper design standards moot when a car hits a bumper on an SUV, e.g..

Select parts:

"Old versus new bumper tests: The Institute began conducting low-speed crash tests at 5 mph into a flat barrier in 1969. These tests led to the first federal bumper rules for cars, which required the bumpers to resist damage in impacts up to 5 mph. These requirements eventually were rolled back by the Reagan Administration in 1982. B

"Vintage Ford shows how: Bumpers used to do a better job of resisting damage in
minor impacts. Under federal requirements that were in effect until 1982, car
bumpers had to keep damage away from vehicle safety equipment and sheet metal
parts in collisions at speeds up to 5 mph. Even damage to the bumpers themselves
was limited. But since 1982 the test speed under the federal standard
has been cut in half. It’s now 2.5 mph, and unlimited damage is allowed to
vehicles’ bumper systems.
To demonstrate how this rollback has affected bumper performance, the Institute
got a 1981 Ford Escort, which met the old requirements, and put it through
ó PAGE 7 ó Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
a new battery of front and rear bumper tests. Comparison of this car’s performance
with those of new cars is dramatic.
For one thing, the bumpers on the Escort extend out from the car body to help
keep the headlights, grille, and sheet metal away from the energy of impacts.
Behind the bumper bar, the Escort has components that work like shock absorbers
to dissipate the energy of an impact before it can damage the car
body — and these components can absorb energy again in subsequent collisions,
while the crushable energy absorbers that are components of most modern car
bumpers can’t. They have to be replaced after each minor impact.
“The Escort aced the 3 mph corner tests with zero damage,” Lund says. “In
the full-front test at 6 mph, the $86 worth of damage was limited to the
bumper itself. There was more damage in the full-rear test but still only
$383. This is much lower than for the 17 new cars we tested. The best performer
among the new cars sustained 10 times as much damage as the Escort
in the same 4 tests.”

Note the constant reference to the actual cost of the repair due to damage in low speed impacts for various designs.

For those who made it here beyond 150 words, here's the full length article:
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/030107_bumper_crash_tests_report.pdf

bwia

imid, thanks for doing the research and thanks for sharing. I agree with the findings of the research but would never have guessed the dramatic repair costs of today's cars compared to the Escort. According to the attachment the report was released in 2007. Ten years later I wonder if the trend still holds.

Since you have distinguished yourself as the dean of automotive history here at Edmunds I/we bestow upon you the Doctor of Automotive History, honoris causa

roadburner

ab348 said:

I love the subliminal message:
"The sled I had to settle for gets mistaken for the car I really wanted."

ab348

The bumper stuff is interesting. While the battering-ram bumpers of the '70s needed to go away, it seems that where we got to is even worse than the pre-government-intervention 60s bumper style. A chrome bumper from that era with a rub strip would just work in parking lot situations. Today's body-color flexible bumper always get a mark or worse. They are considered sacrificial. D'oh.

driver100

Not only that......but, she is happy to get a ticket because the moron ticket guy thought her car was a Cadillac!

driver100

Imid....good research and does beg the question....is appearance more important than functionality?

I guess the overhang could have allowed for more room for hydraulic or spring loaded bumpers ???????